Easy Should Be Easy

[PratzStrike]

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/56701

This. Isn't this what you guys have been asking for in this thread? A way for the game to be frigging stupid hard yet allow people who need the help to see how it's done?

Personally, I tend to agree with Void - I like hard games. I recently played through both S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games and I'm eagerly (what's a more emphatic word than eagerly that means "I will tear into this game with all the fury of a rabid wolf pack attacking a rabbit farm."?) awaiting Call of Pripyat. Gaming is not exactly a intuitive thing - you've got to hook all these wires up to the TV, then figure out what all the buttons do, and we haven't even gotten into deciding what kinds of games to play yet! Most of the people in this thread are gamers and we know these things. We found that one game that got us interested, that first hit that got us hooked, because we were curious and it looked fun and it WAS fun, and we got to playing it and learned things by trial and error. And then we picked up another interesting game, and another, and each of these games built up our knowledge of game theory, in that we understood instinctively that we're supposed to press the buttons to get effects and so on, and then we're gamers.

Making that barrier of see/do/learn less complex to newcomers into gaming wouldn't be a bad thing. But trying to remove it totally is actually counterproductive. There's two ways to learn something, and people tend to gravitate towards one of those two ways - seeing it done, doing it yourself, being 'hands-on' with the materials, and picking it up that way. The other is having the situation described to you by a knowledgeable teacher who can educate you on the subject. We have a lot of the first in gaming, and not as much in the second - at least, not for the casual gamer. There's discussion boards and videos and even classes about how to play video games, even specific video games (Starcraft 101, anyone?) but the normal beginning player has no idea where to find this stuff. Which brings us back around to Nintendo's patent and the point of this article and my post. Something like that would be useful for the people who want or need that level of hand-holding but still allow the designers to make a good, hard game, and give the rest of us the challenge we crave.

 

[Susan Arendt]

You asked if we want games to be enjoyed by a wide variety of people.

I don't :\

Ok, I have to ask: why not?

I mean it seems alot of people in the gaming community are focused on "spreading" gaming. I just think the people it appeals too with naturally gravitate towards it. Video games have been around in some form for nearly 40 years, I think most people know what it contains. Not everybody will like everything.

Which doesn't explain why you don't want more people playing games.

Here's the thing -- there are people who are now becoming interested in games who simply never were before. Maybe it's because they simply didn't have much exposure to them, maybe it's because they were busy with other things, maybe it's because they were misinformed. Could be any number of reasons. But I see no reason why it would be a bad thing to make games accessible to a wider variety of players -- players with no interest or intention of ever becoming a "real" gamer. (Again, for the sake of argument, we're assuming that such accessibility wouldn't be coming at a cost to the core players...that games would still deliver the same gameplay for experienced gamers that they always have.)

 

[Susan Arendt]

You asked if we want games to be enjoyed by a wide variety of people.

I don't :\

Ok, I have to ask: why not?

I mean it seems alot of people in the gaming community are focused on "spreading" gaming. I just think the people it appeals too with naturally gravitate towards it. Video games have been around in some form for nearly 40 years, I think most people know what it contains. Not everybody will like everything.

Which doesn't explain why you don't want more people playing games.

Here's the thing -- there are people who are now becoming interested in games who simply never were before. Maybe it's because they simply didn't have much exposure to them, maybe it's because they were busy with other things, maybe it's because they were misinformed. Could be any number of reasons. But I see no reason why it would be a bad thing to make games accessible to a wider variety of players -- players with no interest or intention of ever becoming a "real" gamer. (Again, for the sake of argument, we're assuming that such accessibility wouldn't be coming at a cost to the core players...that games would still deliver the same gameplay for experienced gamers that they always have.)

I didn't mean I am against newcomers, more like "eh I don't care, everyones different".

I mean I will not be pro-active in this cause or anything.

It is really weird how some people are becoming interested in games all of a sudden, I remember I got ridiculed for my gaming obsession all through elementary-highschool. This could be another reason that some people are against the "dumbing down" as they put it, its odd that the thing everyone hated is becoming the thing people love.

EDITED TWICE FOR SPELLING gahhh I better just stop.

I was made fun of, too. Still am, from time to time. But remaining isolationist isn't the answer. For example, a woman I used to work with was shocked to discover that I was an avid gamer. "I thought videogames were all misogynistic," she said. Exact quote. I assured her that wasn't the case, and introduced her to some games that, knowing her, I thought she might enjoy. She's certainly not hardcore, but she's found many games that she enjoys a great deal and no longer looks at gaming as a destructive or negative hobby.

I firmly believe that everyone can enjoy gaming if they're simply exposed to it in ways that make sense to them.

 

[PratzStrike]

I assured her that wasn't the case, and introduced her to some games that, knowing her, I thought she might enjoy.

Which games were those, if I might ask?

 

[Zyxzy]

Wow, I had no idea I knew so much about video games.

 

[Beatrix]

The third idea is excellent and I really like how it was implemented in the remake of Monkey Island. The other two... I'm less a fan of.

The first will make (some) people stop trying and intentionally fail several times just so the invincibility kicks in. I'd suggest an adaptive difficulty instead, making an encounter/event/segment easier with consecutive retries, it's more gradual, might not even be noticed.

The second is ok... until you consider this from an evil designer's point of view, they will go "Wait, I can put in whatever ridiculously unfair and cheap sequence I want and all I have to do is make sure they get to pick between passing it and losing 90% of their cash? Sweet"

Nice read though, and definitely something more developers should try to keep in mind.

 

[xscoot]

These are all great ideas, but none of them would help my dad. I introduced him to Half-Life 2 recently, and his main problem were the doorways.

Whenever he found a doorway, he'd get stuck in it, and spend a lot of time trying to line himself up just perfectly to get through it correctly. What can you do to fix that, movement assist?

 

[Escapefromwhatever]

I like options 2 and 3, and also the hint part of option one, but invincibility just seems like it could be exploited- if a person really needs invincibility, using a skip would suffice.

 

[Quaidis]

This article was brilliant. I enjoyed reading it and the view taken towards new gamers.

I also agree with what was listed. Though instead of going invincible, perhaps a hint menu or - if the game is easy for the sake of being easy - the boss is toned down and easier to kill (or it is harder to kill the new gamer). Gaming is generally about achieving a goal. Even new gamers understand this. If you play tennis, you play to hit the ball past the opponent. If you bowl, you bowl to hit all the pins down. If you play solitaire, you play it so all the cards are gone. Letting gamers effectively jump past an obstacle that is supposed to be the 'win' of that game would remove the sensation of gaming goals.

 

[LooK iTz Jinjo]

A game that is too hard for 1 person is better than a game that is too easy for everyone. Most people would prefer a challenge than to just being able to waltz through a game killing everything just by looking at it.

 

[Daedalus1942]

I think this a very friendly and nurturing way of handling the casual gamer crowd. However, every one of these ideas have been implemented before and, more often than not, are either completely worthless or unable to be turned off. This trend towards reward for not doing anything is not going to help gamers as a whole. Sure, more people will be able to finish the game, but there is no sense of accomplishment. We're past the age of "Godmode." Let people succeed or fail by their own merits.

Most games don't even have a godmode these days, or even cheats per se.
I don't really care. I pray they don't make games easier.
I'm really looking forward to Demon Soul's. That looks so incredibly hard/fun.

 

[The Heik]

Well looks like mediocrity is taking over.

The whole idea of praising crappy gamers for being crappy is stupid. letting them think that they're great is cruel, because eventually their puffed-up egos will be put up against more hardcore gamers, who will beat them, and make them feel worse about themselves. Anyway, these suggestions outlined in the article have already been tried. And they failed. All it does is make the sense of achievement feel hollow.

Also, casual gamers only buy games intermittently, so trying to make games for them is like shooting yourself in the foot. THey won't buy any more games, and it'll scare away the more hardcore gamers who actually hold up the gaming industry. Very bad economic plan.

 

[Azdron]

Oh god yes, I cant even begin to count how many times ive come to after finishing a maelstrom of gore and chaos and just wondered "now what was I doing here again?" or "man who were those guys and why were they SO angry?" or "Woohooo, Now what was my actual objective here again?" A "what am I doing now?" Button would be fucking epic. I really liked fables glowing trail and dead spaces holo projection thing. Man fuck maps, maps are for NERDS.